(a) In a case where the autonomous possessor has filed a lawsuit claiming the cancellation of ownership transfer registration against the former owner during the prescription period, but the loss has been determined, whether the possession frequently changes into the possession of other owner;

(b) The selection of the starting point of occupation;

A. Even if an independent occupant filed a lawsuit claiming the cancellation of ownership transfer registration against the former owner of the relevant real estate during the period of prescriptive acquisition, but lost it, the possession is not an independent possession.

(b) Any person who intends to obtain prescription benefits may choose at will the starting date of his own possession or the starting date of his possession from the starting point of his possession;

Article 245 of the Civil Act

Sudden LLC Co., Ltd.

Attorney Kang Ho-won, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daegu High Court Decision 80Na169 delivered on August 28, 1980

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the first ground for appeal:

While the prescriptive acquisition period for the instant real estate is in progress, the Plaintiff, who is the autonomous occupant of the instant real estate, filed a lawsuit against the former owner of the instant real estate, who is the owner of the instant real estate, to demand the cancellation of ownership transfer registration procedure, and became final and conclusive against the losing party, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s aforementioned autonomous possession is converted into the possession of the owner of the instant real estate. Therefore, there is no argument to criticize the determination of evidence and the fact-finding,

2. On the second ground for appeal:

The decision of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no misapprehension of the legal principles as to the starting point of the statute of limitations in the judgment below, and there is no argument that it is inconsistent with the judgment of the court below.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Presiding Justice (Presiding Justice)